Is Hosting the Olympics Worth the Fight?

Every four years, one country hosts the Olympics, which is arguably the most significant sports event there is. A plethora of countries battle each year to host the Olympics, in hopes of improving the country’s economy and worldwide reputation. However, the Olympics doesn’t always bring such positive effects, causing people to ask one significant question: Is hosting the Olympics really worth it?

The country chosen to host the Olympics must take years to prepare for the event. The architecture, businesses, and people themselves must be set and up to date for the mass tourism that will come in during the Olympics. A new reputation will be earned in the representation they bring during the huge sports event, and the country must be at their peak to bring in benefits.

Some countries have seen the positives after hosting the Olympics. For example, in the 1992 games held in Barcelona, the post-Olympic affects consisted of a large count of new roads, new sewage systems, and an impressive 78% increase in new green areas and beaches over the existing number. In addition, Barcelona had a notably high decrease in unemployment, producing 88.7% of the city’s overall drop within their unemployment rates.

Another example includes the London Olympics back in 2012, in which $14 billion was brought in. Not only did the city and country as a whole gain in profits, but they also improved their transport systems, housing, infrastructure, and sporting interests from the games. In social terms, the projects made to improve the overall look of the city allowed sustainable living after the games itself. These Olympics also addressed disability inequality, which increased funding for the Paralympics which were soon after.

As demonstrated, the Olympics can bring strong assets when it comes to the future effects of the host. On the other hand, many countries have not seen the same benefits after hosting the worldwide event.

In 2008, Beijing, China was chosen as the host of the Olympics, yet they continue to struggle from financial hit of the games. After spending $40 billion dollars into infrastructure, the once crowded stadiums and buildings are now abandoned. China spent a great deal of money only to create large places without a plan after its one time use. To add onto the pile, some of these stadiums were built in areas that were once homes, for five million Beijing residents were evicted in order to have room for the infrastructures. Some Olympic hosts have overspent, and still suffer from the downfall years later.

Beijing wasn’t the only host to receive negative effects, for the last Olympics in 2016, held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, has not seen any better. Brazil has a similar issue, with the once beautiful stadium known as the Maracana, now an abandoned waste of space, with missing chairs, vandalism, and even a worm infestation. Without any use for it, the stadium has become a sad place and reminder of Brazil’s economy, which was no better than before. Also, with the scare of the water crisis, Brazil didn’t gain when it came to the country’s world representation. While many hoped the Olympics could aid Brazil in their economy and suffering recession, there was very little positives when it came to the economy or their reputation.

The Olympics are an important event for people around the world; athlete or not. If questioning whether it’s worth the costs, then that is unknown. Hosting the Olympics is a huge risk, and some countries have turned their economy and reputation around, while others have fallen down hard. When it comes to hosting the Olympics, it’s often a risk worth taking if the games are played correctly.

FEATURED STORIES
RECENT POSTS
ARCHIVES
SEARCH BY TAGS
FOLLOW US
  • Black Twitter Icon
  • Black Instagram Icon

© 2018 | WEST TECH TIMES | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED